Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 12887268

Tipranavir.

Abstract

Tipranavir is a potent and selective non-peptidic HIV-1 protease inhibitor with a markedly improved resistance profile compared with traditional, peptidomimetic protease inhibitors. The presence of five or fewer protease gene mutations or one or two protease inhibitor resistance-associated mutations (PRAMs) is associated with reduced susceptibility to currently available protease inhibitors. However, 16-20 mutations (including three or more PRAMs) may be needed to confer resistance to tipranavir. Tipranavir-based therapy achieved sustained viral suppression for more than 48 weeks in a small phase II trial in multiple protease inhibitor-experienced HIV-infected patients. A large dose-finding study demonstrated potent virological reduction through 14 days of functional monotherapy in heavily pretreated HIV-infected patients with 6 to >20 protease gene mutations at baseline. Two large, ongoing, phase III trials in patients with multi-drug resistant HIV infection are comparing the efficacy of tipranavir/ritonavir 500/200mg twice daily plus a patient-individualised background antiretroviral regimen versus other ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor regimens. In general, tipranavir has been well tolerated in clinical trials. As with other protease inhibitors, the most common adverse events with tipranavir have been gastrointestinal disturbances.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Greg L Plosker, David P Figgitt. 2003. Tipranavir.. https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-200363150-00009

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Mistletoe for cancer? A systematic review of randomised clinical trials.

Mistletoe extracts are widely used in the treatment of cancer. The results of clinical trials are however highly inconsistent. We therefore conducted a systematic review of all randomised clinical trials of this unconventional therapy. Eight databases were searched to identify all studies that met our inclusion/exclusion criteria. Data were independently validated and extracted by 2 authors and checked by the 3rd according to predefined criteria. Statistical pooling was not possible because of the heterogeneity of the primary studies. Therefore a narrative systematic review was conducted. Ten trials could be included. Most of the studies had considerable weaknesses in terms of study design, reporting or both. Some of the weaker studies implied benefits of mistletoe extracts, particularly in terms of quality of life. None of the methodologically stronger trials exhibited efficacy in terms of quality of life, survival or other outcome measures. Rigorous trials of mistletoe extracts fail to demonstrate efficacy of this therapy.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

On the non-inferiority of a diagnostic test based on paired observations.

Non-inferiority of a diagnostic test to the standard or the optimum test is a common issue in medical research. Often we want to determine if a new diagnostic test is as good as the standard reference test. Sometimes we are interested in an inexpensive test that may have an acceptably inferior sensitivity or specificity. While hypothesis testing procedures and sample size formulae for the equivalence of sensitivity or specificity alone have been proposed, very few studies have discussed simultaneous comparisons of both parameters. In this paper, we present three different testing procedures and sample size formulae for simultaneous comparison of sensitivity and specificity based on paired observations and with known disease status. These statistical procedures are then used to compare two classification rules that identify women for future osteoporotic fracture. Simulation experiments demonstrate that the new tests and sample size formulae give the appropriate type I and II error rates. Differences between our approach and the approach of Lui and Cumberland are discussed.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗